30 days ago, Amazon announced that it was in the process of assorting Apple TVs and Chromecasts to start selling them again. Since then, the Apple TV and Apple TV 4K have been available and sold on the site, but the Chromecast and Chromecast Ultra are still showing as "Currently unavailable" from Amazon, with no third-party sellers at all. Even searching for "Chromecast" on Amazon doesn't bring up the product pages linked above, you'd have to know the URL to see them. We've reached out to Amazon several times over the past weeks to ask about this and to inquire about an exact availability date, but were told there were no details to share.

So what's the hold up? The most "obvious" (even if illogical for me) explanation goes back to the reason why Amazon removed the Chromecast and Apple TV in the first place. It claimed that it doesn't want to confuse customers by offering a product that doesn't support Prime Video, and thus now the Apple TV is back because the Prime Video app was released for it. But the Android app for Prime Video still doesn't support Chromecast (although the Amazon Music app recently added Chromecast) and so Amazon is waiting until the dev team (its own dev team) releases that so it can magically finish "assorting" and start selling Chromecasts again. I repeat, it's the obvious reason but Amazon's logic is flawed.

The second explanation could be way more complicated than that. Amazon and Google are locked in an arm-wrestling match and this does seem to be a bargaining chip between the two, in which YouTube and Nest have also recently played a part. For all we know, Google could be holding Chromecast stock back from Amazon, or maybe Amazon could be holding off on Prime Video's support (even if it was ready) and thus Chromecast's sale. The only thing I'm certain of is that many, many lawyers and negotiators are getting paid to figure this out and that consumers are suffering because of this bickering. But I do hope whatever solution gets worked out, even if it takes time, does take into consideration the potential future head-to-heads these two giants are going to find themselves in, from devices to retail to services. If CES 2018 showed us anything, it's that Alexa and Assistant are going to be at the center of the interfaces of our future, and right now Amazon and Google overlap in many areas of their businesses, way more than Amazon and Apple do, which is possibly why the Apple TV situation got sorted out so quickly.

I can't help but wonder, if this was the EU, Amazon and Google would have been slapped by an anti-competitive lawsuit and this would have all been over now.

I'm sorry ahmad, even though I did understand that, for the sake of the comment section and proper communication, you'll need to write in English so that everyone understands.
Releases for Echo devices and other devices from Amazon are slow outside the US. Same for Google and most companies... It's the same story all the time.

ahmad

the local shops in australia are cheaper than amazon !

im just waiting for the amazon devices to be available ! especially the cheap tablet ( amazon fire hd 10 )

and the kids tablet too

notovny

Last I checked, there weren't any other Google-Assistant Smart Speakers on Amazon, regardless of manufacturer, either. And if the Bose QC 35s on Amazon are the ones that have Google Assistant built in, there's no mention of it in their listing.

The Bose QC35 Series II, by definition, have the Assistant. But you're right in saying the product description doesn't mention that anywhere. Only one reviewer says it, I'm surprised Amazon didn't censor that.
As for the rest of the Chromecast/Assistant speakers, some have never made it to Amazon (JBL Playlist, JBL Link series come to mind). But the NVIDIA SHIELD, many Android TVs, and several Chromecast soundbars from Sony and LG and others, like the LG SJ9, Polk Audio MagniFi Mini are available and do mention "Chromecast" in the description. And they have been available for years, not just now that Amazon Music supports casting. It's anyone's guess WTF the policy is for third-party products because that's a ridiculous mess.

Nate

Amazing that this has been basically going on for the past 5 or so years, starting with Amazon holding their prime video app hostage etc. You would think both of these companies would wake the f up and realize the only people they are screwing is the consumer

Imparus

The first explanation goes out the windows as soon as someone look at the Anycast, which is a chinese ripoff off Chromecast, and Anycast doesn't support amazon video either...

Exactly. But would you think Amazon would remove any and all streaming devices that don't support Prime? Of course not. They just wanted to kill their major competitors, Apple and Google.

Imparus

I'm well aware that it is actually about Amazon wanting to sell more of its own hardware to lock people into their services, it was more to point out that it was a bs argument Amazon used for not allowing Chromecast on the amazon market.

"I can't help but wonder, if this was the EU, Amazon and Google would have been slapped by an anti-competitive lawsuit and this would have all been over now."

No need to wonder, here in the EU is the exact same situation and no slaps...
I am an Amazon Prime member and no Chromecasts on Amazon.it (or .de or .fr or .es or anywhere else). I bought my Chromecast (which I love BTW) from the Google Store.

Google Pixels, Daydream and Nest products are sold though. The only other thing missing, besides Chromecasts, are Google Home products but the explanation here is that they do not support some of our languages yet (they aren't sold on the Google Store either).

I think that sentence was misunderstood. I meant if these two companies were European, they'd be slapped by anti-competitive fines from the EU. Given that they're American, none of them will complain to the EU about the other.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Well none of them is complaining about the other in the US either. The US does have antitrust authorities as well.
And besides that, both EU and US antitrust authorities can initiate investigations on their own, no need for formal complaints from any of the parties (which also do not need to be from a US or EU country, all is needed for the relevant authority to be able to take action is that they operate respectively in the US or EU market).

ahmad

amazon prime video is available on apple TV ! I want twitch to make an official app for the apple tv too !

Lord Argyris

I'm so sick of this stupid turf war. I just want my hardware and services to work with one another, as they're clearly capable of doing (Amazon uses Android, after all). I don't want to be locked into Google hardware to do Googly things, and then Amazon hardware to do Amazony things. I want to do all the things, on whichever hardware I choose.

If it means anything, stupid scuffles like this make me think less of both companies involved, which means I'm less likely to invest in either one's ecosystem. I can't be the only customer who feels this way (FTR, I was a loyal Nexus buyer and will most likely replace my aging 5X with this year's smaller Pixel, and I've been subscribed to Prime for years).

surethom

Childish Amazon that's the main reason I guess.

bekifft

Google is just as childish, and they are the ones who have decided they want to compete with every single tech company on Earth whether they actually have a good product or not.

So Google shouldn't compete with "every single tech company on Earth"? Why is that exactly? As far as I know, Google has every reason and opportunity to compete in any tech category as any other company.

bekifft

Well sure, it's a free country. But that's what leads to a lot of the poor quality, abruptly canceled products that people like to complain about so much around here.

Well since the subject is Chromecast, ur concerns seem to not be of an issue here then. Chromecast has been a huge success for Google's hardware business sector.

bekifft

Chromecast is the ONLY huge success for Google's hardware business, and the only one not plagued with issues.

I agree they seem willing to take risks, but I disagree that they seem to learn from them.

Can you provide an example of a success they've had based on learning from a past failure? To me they seem to just shutdown one product and start up a very similar one with a whole different set of issues but the same fundamental problems, for example everything they've done around messaging, Nexus / Pixel, etc.

In both those cases one could argue that they actually had something that worked and their current efforts are a step back.

Jeremy

Apparently you're unaware of all the complaints about how Chromecast is sucking up so much network bandwidth (even when it's not being used) that it's knocking other devices off WiFi.

bekifft

I'm aware but the much louder noise seems to be around the Home. I've had three Chromecasts connected for years. This issue just cropped up around the time they released the Home Max. Probably a common firmware bug.

Google Pixel's camera software was originally developed for Google Glass and evolved over the years to what we have now. A lesson learned from a device that "failed".

Also, the Pixel and Nexus lines of devices are two completely different endeavors by Google.

bekifft

Alright true enough I'm sure there are some lessons learned, there must be, but I was thinking more consumer facing stuff.

Hard to think of an example on the Google side, but like Apple with Mobile Me and iCloud. They had something that didn't work, scrapped it, and put something better in its place.

Google just scraps things no one was complaining about, and replaces them with new stuff no one asked for, like Hangouts and Allo. Like Reader and Google+. Like Nexus and Pixel.

JRomeo

Amazon was the one that decided to compete with Google........ Google released the chromecast FIRST, and then lo and behold, Amazon decided to compete with Google and be childish about it.

bekifft

I admit this may not be the best case to bring up Google competing with everyone. I can't help but wonder in this specific case though, because Google has a history of being anti-competitive with rival software companies, namely Microsoft. They pull the same stuff with them.

Tristian Hill

I'm lucky enough to have Chromecast built into my Bravia, but before that, it was a quick drive to the he nearest electronics store to pick one up
(I actually worked there at the time and picked it up on shift, but I've since left and gotten Home and Home Minis from.there) I'd pick that option over a Fire TV stick ordered on Prime 10 times out of 10

keith brown

You can buy them from loads of places. Who cares.
shop somewhere else

Suicide_Note

Exactly.

Duder12

Or amaozn just made the listing so the media like Android police would report them as the good guys.

When the listing first went up everyone was reporting Amazon was selling them again. It was basically a fake news trick by Amazon and it worked.

Exactly why we stayed on them to see if these actually show up in stock.

Duder12

Good job. Much appreciated. Keep covering it!

Kent Seaton

You can't even search for it with their own search engine... it's like the search uses bing as their back end routine or something useless like that. I do have a firestick... kinda sucked, so I loaded it up with Kodi and a bunch of streaming addons. Works better now.

Adrian

Amazon decided it doesn't need the money. I happily bought it elsewhere, on sale, and had it in home the same day. I stopped renting movies from Amazon over this foolishness as well so other companies are benefiting.

Jeremy

I still don't get the appeal of Chromecast. Used it once and ditched it. Maybe if I had my phone surgically attached to my hand like some people do, I'd find it useful.

Adrian

Roku yes. Smart TV, no. The software stops getting updated pretty quickly when new models come out and you're stuck with a clunky, slow UI. Been there. Now I have a Roku and some Chromecasts and the Smart TV stuff is disabled.

surethom

Much easier to cast YouTube from mobile to TV easier typing on proper keyboard to find things & add to queue.

Jeremy

Maybe that's part of why I don't get Chromecast. I watch Youtube videos on my PC, not my TV.

tim242

Smart TV is a joke. Slow as molasses rolling up a hill.

troyintn

Then you do not own a quality smart tv... My 50" Samsung smart tv will run circles around my old chromcast

tim242

My TV is a 50" Samsung TV.

Jeremy

I wonder where all you people get such lemons.

tim242

"Smart" TV has always been slow and clunky.

Jeremy

Mine isn't. So you must have gotten a lemon.

pfmiller

It's easier to start a video, but once the video is playing the experience controlling the playback sucks. I typically add videos to my play later queue from the phone then play them from the native YouTube app.

AlejandroZ

You can use your TV's remote to control Chromecast if the TV has the adecuate technology to do so.

pfmiller

Pause and unpause only, unless they changed something recently.

Matt

The same reason that Amazon hasn't made ANY Android TV boxes compatible to download their app from the Play Store, i.e. Nexus Player. (I am not counting devices that have it pre-installed out of box.)

Naushad Shukoor

Chromecast 2 didn't support 60 fps youtube video playback earlier. So videos which came with it (ex. Mr. Mobile's) was playing with heavy glitch. And because of the way chromecast works couldn't select the video quality manually. Opted for preview program(pp) firmware few months back; it auto updated to latest PP. Still the same. Until today, when i fired it up noticed a few UI changes like toast message "'s successfully linked to this device" displayed on TV. Just checked with a 60 fps video and to my surprise it worked! Addition of this one feature made this device complete :D

AlejandroZ

And when did it start playing 60 fps videos? I think 720p 60fps videos have been working for almost 2 years now.

MicroNix

Maybe I'm missing something here. You have a 2017 Smart TV. What does Chromecast give you that you don't get with native TV apps? And I'm talking TV useful apps not the ability to install apps that make no sense on a TV. Perhaps it's because I have a gen 1 Chromecast laying in a box somewhere but it was the most useless device I have ever purchased.

Easy screen casting (whatever's on ur screen). Voice controls if you have Assistant (phone, Google Home). I'm not going to get into app compatibility, the essentials are on both chromecast and any smart tv, everything else is a fringe case usually.
And to me, given the crazy vulnerabilities lately, I decided not to connect my TV to the internet because I don't trust that any tv will be updated with patches or whatever. So one less thing to worry about. The chromecast receives more frequent updates, which means much less risk to be vulnerable to anything.
FYI, I have a Samsung 55" super extra mega whatever, that was released in 2017. Still, don't trust them on my network.

Jeremy

Opposite here. Chromecast went into the dustbin after one use. Roku was my favorite device until I got a Samsung Smart TV. Haven't used the Roku since. But it's still connected if I ever want to use it for something.

Well the privacy thing wasn't my main concern but it should still be considered. I'm not a huge fan of my TV doing things like that without my permission. It looks like you're fine with it. Different folks, different strokes.

Rob

As I wrote above, I think "smart TV" is basically junk. And its apps are junk too, in my opinion. When I bought a TV two years ago, I specifically looked for one without smart features. Because the only device I connect to it is my chromecast. I don't even have a tv receiver, I don't watch TV in the old way.

Jeremy

Until I got my Smart TV, the only device I used was a Roku. I still have my Roku hooked up, but I never use it anymore. The Smart TV does everything I want. I cut the cable a long time ago, and never use OTA TV.

tim242

Chromecast has been the only way we have watched TV, since its release.

Rob

Because "smart TV" is basically junk. And its apps are junk too, in my opinion. When I bought a TV two years ago, I specifically looked for one without smart features. Because the only device I connect to it is my chromecast. I don't even have a tv receiver, I don't watch TV in the old way.

Jeremy

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy yours. I'm loving mine.

MicroNix

Actually I have to disagree. The apps on my smart tvs aren't junk at all. They function great. And I can actually mirror my Samsung phone to the tv unlike Chromecast which couldnt mirror a phone to save its life. Complete garbage.

Rob

Well, my phone can share its screen with the chromecast without any problem. I guess, if you had a non-samsung phone it wouldn't connect properly with your samsung tv (I guess you have a samsung tv).

Jeremy

Yeah, but a Chromecast has a dynamite "router killer" feature.

Rob

Haha please explain that. You mean the Google Home Max or what it's called, don't you?

Jeremy

Nope. It looks like it's not limited to any single Google home product. Even Chromecast seems to kill networks, whether you're using it at the time or not.

Native apps on Smart TVs such as Samsung are complete garbage. They rarely get updates, have really awful UI and lag. I'd take a GoogleCast (or Android TV) device any day vs non-Google Android TVs of any kind.

MicroNix

Wow, then you must have not used them lately because that's not my experience on 2017 tvs.

Just block all the Google stuff for every Amazon product out there (als YouTube webpage).

LouisCAD

Or maybe Apple just threatened to ban iPhones, iPads, Macs and all from Amazon, which would obviously represent a significant loss for Amazon

Rob

Looking forward to that :-D

Ken Vincent

Amazon's "customer confusion argument is completely transparent BS. Forget for a minute that the only reason Chromecast doesn't work with Amazon Video is because Amazon doesn't want it to. When you search for Chromecast on amazon you get a plethora of crappy look-a-like miracast knockoffs of Chromecast. If Amazon truly didn't want their customers to be confused they would either return Chromecast, or "not found" when customers search for Chromecast.

You can't be the "Everything Store" if you don't sell the most popular hardware of one of the largest companies in the world.

bekifft

Every single time you hear any tech company use the words "customer confusion" it is always a completely bold faced lie that they know they can get away with because the only way to call them on it is in court.

They use "customer confusion" to their advantage all the time, like bad website layouts that hide the option to cancel service, for example.

You do realize that the verb "suffer" can mean things other than physical pain, right? Here, it's being used to say sustain a disadvatange or experience loss, as in the 2nd definition of the intransitive form: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/suffer and every other

Pete Tsarria

Ah yes, the mental anguish caused by actually having to VISIT a Target, or Wal-Mart, or Best Buy... and I can see how it might be such a disadvantage or lost experience to have to push a button on one of the aforementioned retailers' e-commerce websites as opposed to Amazon's in order to gain the prized ChromeCast... #ohtheagony

No. That sentence was about the entire bickering fight. In context, it means customers are having a bad experience, because one day products are on Amazon (Chromecasts, certain nest things), the next they disappear, and one day YouTube is on their Fire Tv, the next it says it'll stop working in a few weeks, and one day Amazon figures out a solution to YouTube on the Echo Show, the next Google blocks it, and one Android TV device has Prime while the next one they buy doesn't.
And as the sentence right after says, the overlap these two companies have in varying domains (retail in Amazon vs Express, cloud in AWS vs Google Cloud, AI in Alexa vs Assistant, search and predictions, and more and more and more) can spell so much trouble for everyone if they keep blocking each other like this. I wish it was as simple as a fight about where to buy your chromecast.

faceless128

They should stop selling chromebooks

faceless128

This is really about the cast api being married to play services.

If the fire tablet can't cast Amazon Video to a Chromecast it would cause confusion

Let's be fair -- Google didn't block FireTV from accessing YouTube until now. Amazon started the whole thing, not Google.

ikeofkc

Amazon get your head out of your butt and implement google cast support, someone with almost no coding ability can implement release for testing faster than you. People view your app team as incompetent as it's a standard expected feature these days/

"You do realize that the verb "suffer" can mean things other than physical pain, right? Here, it's being used to say sustain a disadvatange or experience loss, as in the 2nd definition of the intransitive form: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/suffer"

And then following that with

"No. That sentence was about the entire bickering fight. In context, it means customers are having a bad experience, because one day products are on Amazon (Chromecasts, certain nest things), the next they disappear, and one day YouTube is on their Fire Tv, the next it says it'll stop working in a few weeks, and one day Amazon figures out a solution to YouTube on the Echo Show, the next Google blocks it, and one Android TV device has Prime while the next one they buy doesn't.
And as the sentence right after says, the overlap these two companies have in varying domains (retail in Amazon vs Express, cloud in AWS vs Google Cloud, AI in Alexa vs Assistant, search and predictions, and more and more and more) can spell so much trouble for everyone if they keep blocking each other like this. I wish it was as simple as a fight about where to buy your chromecast."

Jeremy

It's still a bit of hyperbole. It isn't much of a "disadvantage or experience loss" to get the product from one of many other sources besides Amazon.

Jeremy

I find a pet rock to be more useful than a Chromecast, so I'm not shedding any tears.

The commenter missed the 2 replies I wrote for this very same comment. Check your dictionary. Suffering doesn't mean physical pain only, it has many definitions (regardless of which dictionary you look in) and one of them is being at a disadvantage or have a bad experience.
What I find surprising is everyone being appalled by a legitimate use of a verb, when it was quite obvious to me... despite English only being my 3rd language. Perhaps my school was really good after all.